Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Unpopular film & TV opinions

yes there’s plenty of films with long shots and not much happening that I would describe as slow. Just not the sort of thing you have referred to as slow.
Slow isn’t necessarily a pejorative word in entertainment. Sometimes it’s good to take time to establish a certain mood or setting or whatever. But dialogue-heavy films are not slow just cos they have little action in them. You find out a lot about the characters and that’s entertainment.
I will not apologise for my view of you as someone with poor critical faculties and very little discernment, because it is sincerely held. It’s exasperating to read.
I too think many of your opinions of films and shows are laughably bad and inexplicable. In many cases, most others including top critics around the world have very contrasting views to your damning reviews of certain films or shows. I could do a few searches and point out the many films or shows over the years with nearly universal acclaim if not 100% approval ratings that you have absurdly rubbished, but I have better things to do with my time. Besides, when it comes to something as subjective as film and TV tastes, I have the common decency not to be feel so smugly superior to others as to believe I’m always right and those who disagree are not just wrong but clueless if not a bit thick. Also because being a bullying fucking prick is something I try to avoid.

Now kindly fuck off and never engage with me about TV and films again.
 
I have faith in my own opinions, fuckwit.
You just go along with what the majority thinks and use popularity rather than quality as a yardstick on how to rate a film. Do one.
And remember the name of this thread.
 
I have faith in my own opinions, fuckwit.
You just go along with what the majority thinks and use popularity rather than quality as a yardstick on how to rate a film. Do one.
And remember the name of this thread.
How does the name of this thread give anyone licence for patronising personal attacks? :confused:

And you accuse me of poor critical faculties? Do one already :D
 
How does the name of this thread give anyone licence for patronising personal attacks? :confused:

And you accuse me of poor critical faculties? Do one already :D
Cos I started the thread and unpopular opinions are my bread and butter. I’m fine with other opinions, just not ones that come from a place of ignorance. If you think I’m patronising, then so be it. But this probably reflects the attitude of someone who has no faith in their own opinions, just as much as my exasperation at obtuseness and populism
 
Cos I started the thread and unpopular opinions are my bread and butter. I’m fine with other opinions, just not ones that come from a place of ignorance. If you think I’m patronising, then so be it. But this probably reflects the attitude of someone who has no faith in their own opinions, just as much as my exasperation at obtuseness and populism
Whereas you perhaps think little a bit too highly of yours :thumbs:
 
What I loved about Breaking Bad wasn't just Walter's character's story arc, the normal, ostensibly 'good' bloke turned bad, how he slowly (or relatively quickly, depending on your perspective), descended from desperate dad/husband, determined to do right by his family, very out of his depth, in way over his head, to someone who not only got the measure of the drugs industry, and not only learned to operate in it, but eventually to thrive in it. He had hidden depths, that he plumbed only too willingly. And I don't only mean depths to his character generally, in terms of him not being just one dimensional, he had so many different facets, but also the depths to which he plumbed in terms of criminality/badness - and how much of that was due to his desire/urge to do right by his family, his initial motivation, and how much of that, eventually, was him growing (devolving?) into that kind of character/person. It seemed like he was originally playing that kind of character under duress, because needs must, but then eventually he tapped into something within his own character/psyche... what are any of us capable of, given the 'right' - or rather wrong - conditions?

It reminded me about confidence/fake it till you make it, kind of thing. If you pretend to be a bad guy, and you do bad guy things... at what point do you stop being a good guy pretending to be a bad guy (because needs must), at what point does the ostensibly good guy actually become the bad guy? Is a good guy doing bad things for good reasons still a good guy, or has he crossed over into being a bad guy? How bad do the things he does have to be before that line is crossed and the good guy becomes the bad guy? I found that fascinating.

But what I loved most was Walter's relationship with Jesse and how their character/story arcs oscillated - it wasn't as simple as Walter = teacher = clever = good versus Jesse = high school drop-out/trouble-maker = not clever = bad. On the surface it was, in very, very broad strokes. But what I loved was the interplay between the characters mashing up those simplistic binaries, how Jesse would get into trouble and clever Walter would rescue Jesse from whatever dilemma he was in (as you'd expect, Walter being a teacher, being clever), but the twist was that Walter often got himself into trouble through lack of 'street smart' and Jesse would often have to rescue Walter from himself/from whatever trouble he'd gotten himself into through his lack of street smarts. They were both good, in different ways, they were both bad, in different ways, sometimes bad in the same ways. But through it all, despite their ups and downs, they were in it together, through thick and thin, and there seemed to be an almost father-son type relationship between them, some kind of familial fondness, despite their disparate background and how they ended up entangled together.

I loved all that.

The thing I liked about Breaking Bad was Walter White's ascent into someone who has a purpose in life and is recognised for his talents - I really related to that. That this also a descent into something terrible is fitting. But I actually don't find this latter aspect of it particularly interesting. The lines are too straight. I'm not much into crime fiction tbf.
 
I have never seen anything with Judy Dench where she hasn't just irritated me immediately. I find her acting very stagey and she always seems to play the same character. Posh, clipped with a kind of smoldering that looks like she's going for smoldering - acting that looks like acting - and she pulls the same one note trick every time and it takes me out of it every time. She's the only actor who would put me off seeing something.
 
That business film, Air, about the licensing and marketing of a shit shoe endorsed by a player of a shit sport and made by a company that employed children in their factories looks well crap
 
I have never seen anything with Judy Dench where she hasn't just irritated me immediately. I find her acting very stagey and she always seems to play the same character. Posh, clipped with a kind of smoldering that looks like she's going for smoldering - acting that looks like acting - and she pulls the same one note trick every time and it takes me out of it every time. She's the only actor who would put me off seeing something.
Have you seen Notes on a Scandal? She's magnificent in that. Total opposite fo what you're saying here - for me, she inhabits a character fully. Nothing posh about that character or her portrayal of it. She's also great in the film where she's an old spy. She's great in most things. She's one of those actors who's worth watching even if the film itself is a bit shit. Like M Emmet Walsh.
 
I'm immediately put off anything when it says 'based on true events'. I want my stories to be stories, going where the stories need to go, not hemmed in by what actually happened.
 
Avengers Infinity War is up there with Empire Strikes Back. And Thanos may be the greatest villain.
And when I see in the news the abominable deeds and harm we humans cause to ourselves and the planet as a whole, sometimes I’m almost tempted to think that rather than a villain, Thanos is the hero we didn’t know we needed ;)
 
I'm immediately put off anything when it says 'based on true events'. I want my stories to be stories, going where the stories need to go, not hemmed in by what actually happened.
Is it okay if it clearly is inspired by historical events, but doesn't explicitly say so? Because that's shitloads of great historical dramas and biopics you're immediately put off.
 
And when I see in the news the abominable deeds and harm we humans cause to ourselves and the planet as a whole, sometimes I’m almost tempted to think that rather than a villain, Thanos is the hero we didn’t know we needed ;)

He's certainly a controversial and nuanced character. First time seeing the film since it's theatrical release (5 years already!) and it's still a thrill. Would also say it's a bona fide sci-fi movie.
 
The thing I liked about Breaking Bad was Walter White's ascent into someone who has a purpose in life and is recognised for his talents - I really related to that. That this also a descent into something terrible is fitting. But I actually don't find this latter aspect of it particularly interesting. The lines are too straight. I'm not much into crime fiction tbf.
Thanks for that. Interesting perspective, food for thought. Fascinating that what I perceived to be a descent - from the good guy respectable teacher and husband/father into criminality and gangster as his life unravelled further and further - you perceived to be an ascent.

On reflection, my previous interpretation was too black and, erm, (Walter) white, too simplistic.

He did go from high school teacher heading for retirement into a sort of 'leadership role' however misguided I might've thought his, erm, career change/new career choice. He definitely became more confident and assertive and no nonsense.

So, yeah, I can totally see where you're coming from with your assessment of the situation, can see your point and even agree with it to an extent.

I guess it's just another example of how the series is full of things/issues/situations that, on the surface, are binary, good versus bad, but in reality are much more nuanced.

Again, thanks, really appreciate your pointing that out, making me reconsider my assumptions.
 
Is it okay if it clearly is inspired by historical events, but doesn't explicitly say so? Because that's shitloads of great historical dramas and biopics you're immediately put off.
It's about storytelling. There are loads of great historical things, but they won't give me the same satisfaction as a well told story that goes exactly where it needed to go. The story has to be made up to achieve that. Thinking of my top 10 or 20 or 30 favourite films of all time, not one of them is a true story.
 
What a load of bollocks. Not only is there a lot more to film than mere storytelling (there's a lot more to stories than mere storytelling too, tbh), but a good writer can make almost any story fascinating and powerful anyway. From Shakespeare, Bonnie & Clyde, City of God, Juno to name a few. Bad writers write bad films, good writers write good ones. The rest is bullshit.
 
I have never seen anything with Judy Dench where she hasn't just irritated me immediately. I find her acting very stagey and she always seems to play the same character. Posh, clipped with a kind of smoldering that looks like she's going for smoldering - acting that looks like acting - and she pulls the same one note trick every time and it takes me out of it every time. She's the only actor who would put me off seeing something.
Those Money Super Market adverts are fucking dreadful.
 
With another reboot of a franchise announced today (The Pink Panther with Eddie Murphy), Hollywood is simply devoid of imagination.

Did all the original ideas get used up in the 20th century?
 
Back
Top Bottom